55 coordinated inside and outside the country.”49 It has even been said that this “international military and political criminal organization” was directed “against the constitutional order of each member State, because it coordinated actions tending to suppress and/or maintain the suppression – on the territory of each of them – of the representative institutions; and, to this end, it had allowed them to provide reciprocal support to each other for the continuity of the usurping regimes […] maintained by the power exercised by the senior military, civilian and police authorities of the member countries.”50 66. The Court considers that the preparation and execution of the detention and subsequent torture and disappearance of the victims could not have been perpetrated without the superior orders of the chiefs of police and intelligence and the Head of State himself at the time, or without the collaboration, acquiescence and tolerance revealed by direct actions carried out in a coordinated and interrelated manner by members of the police forces, intelligence services and even diplomatic services of the States concerned. State agents not only failed abysmally to fulfill their obligations to respect and protect the rights of the alleged victims, embodied in Article 1(1) of the American Convention, but used their official position and resources granted by the State to commit the violations. The institutions, mechanisms and powers of a State should function as a guarantee of protection against the criminal activities of its agents. However, it has been verified that the State’s power was orchestrated as a means and resource to violate rights that should have been respected and safeguarded, and actions were implemented using the inter-State collaboration described above. In other words, the State became the principal factor in the grave crimes committed, constituting a clear situation of “State terrorism.” 67. In Paraguay, this situation has been recognized by the convergence of decisions adopted by the three branches of the State: the Executive, by acknowledging the State’s international responsibility in this international jurisdiction and, previously, its Legislature and Judiciary. 68. Thus, on September 12, 1996, the State Legislature promulgated Act No. 838/96 to compensate victims of the human rights violations arising from political or ideological issues that occurred during the dictatorship.51 Likewise, on October 6, 2003, the State adopted Act No. 2225, “establishing the Truth and Justice Commission” “to investigate facts that constitute or could constitute human rights violations committed by State or para-State agents between May 1954 and until the promulgation of the Act and to recommend the adoption of measures to avoid their 49 Cf. Central Trial Court No. 5, National Court of Spain, trial of Miguel Angel Cavallo. Preliminary proceedings 19/97. Crime of terrorism and genocide, September 1, 2000, Madrid, pp. 17, 18 and 146. 50 Cf. Arrest warrant for the extradition of the former President of Bolivia Hugo Banzer, Secretariat No. 14, headed by Dr. Oscar Isidro Aguirre attached to the National Court for Federal Criminal and Correctional Affairs No. 7, Argentina, December 26, 2001, Case No. 13.445/1999, “Videla Jorge Rafael et al. Illegal Deprivation of Personal Liberty,” considerations paragraphs 11 and 10, point 10, subparagraph (h) of para. 3. 51 Article 2 of Act No. 838 establishes that: “the human rights violations arising from political or ideological questions, that shall be compensated by this Act are as follows: (a) forced disappearance of persons; (b) summary or extrajudicial execution; (c) torture with serious and manifest physical and mental aftereffects; and (d) illegitimate deprivation of liberty without an order from a competent authority or owing to a trial or conviction under Acts No. 294 of October 17, 1955, and No. 209 of September 18, 1970, for more than one year”.